@chitownsfinest ...ol gay ass screename, get them dicks out yo mouf...boy.....swerve back hoe
COVID, IVERMECTIN and VACCINE Information Full Feature Documentary
- Thread starter Mixd
- Start date
-
- Tags
- covid ivermectin vaccines
I may not be 100% on this, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Ivermectin is the generic. Merck makes Stromectol. That's their "brand" of Ivermectin.
They are way more expensive sold than generic ivermectin. If you look on Amazon pharmacy right now, ivermectin 3 day dose is $12.99. Stromectol is $95 for the same.
I don't know if they are trying to pull a fast one on the word play you posted from them. Saying Stromectol did this and that in a test study of 109 people. So "Stromectol" may not be having sufficient data or studies.
Ivermectin does.
But you have thousands and thousands treated now with Covid using Ivermectin, globally by numerous physicians.
Internet damn sure then fooled a coward into thanking he ain't one....you slimy spineless piece of shit
Millions...brah.. millions... worldwide..can't even find a single bottle in the state no more.
Dare I say millions. You'd have nuccas on here telling me prove it. I was staying conservative saying thousands.
As for the bottles, that was all the same week of the poison control news. I told you it was shut down everywhere. Showing you the peeps you are up against.
But I'm good, I got my shipment coming in from across the pond.
Dam straight...I say millions and gone stand on it...ain't noun nigga gonna come in here...and disrespect me...when Im not fuckin with them....since when it's been cool to disrespect another nigga, cause he don't believe what you do....that shit start WARS... brah
Stromectol is the brand name like Motrin. Ivermectin is the drug like Ibuprofen. Same shit. Their patent expired in 1996 but was extended to 2004. Most are generics but the drug is exactly the same. If anything is added it's not Ivermectin. Generic are always cheaper. It's no conspiracy theory.
I respect you... brah
Back at you big homie.
We don't agree...but you still intelligent....than a bitch.. brah
Think what I said went over your head.
They may be speaking to their efficiency of only their Stromectol. Or maybe they are on the FDA/CDC favors bandwagon denouncing their own drug.
Who knows. I don't have the answers.
Out of millions treated with it successfully, you'd prefer to trust their test with 109 participants? Versus millions? Or hundreds of thousands?
Cool. It don't work then.
Stick to what works for you.
I just looked up yo shit.....and boy you ain't shit..and don't contribute shit.we don't even need your dumb dick in the mouf..on this BOARD..leave the BOARD..off with yo head bitch
Last edited:
Everybody is a super hero on the net. I have made grown men faint in front of their ol lady.
On God...but in real life...they cowards..and aint with the shits...but on this board..they tough...that's why I want to get em on the phone...and show em..how I Cut... kinsfolk
You know your shit.. and been spot on with no fillers...you ain't screaming anti vax...or pro Vax...just facts...brah
I see yo punk ass is active...and ain't responding.. look hoe...don't throw rocks in a a glass house...cause I will shatter yo shit...bitch
A coward will squeeze themselves into a small hole in the earth before being about that life. Some here never been in a fight or won a fight in their entire lives.
I don't know where to post this, don't want to start yet another Covid thread but as much as I been saying from months ago about the agenda and people pushing for this, here's Gates and Rockefeller pushing the vaccine passports that will be working with blockchain technology for verification.
You will be slaves
You will be slaves
Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished
A newly published medical study found that infection from COVID-19 confers considerably longer-lasting and stronger protection against the Delta variant of the virus than vaccines.
“The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a ‘Don’t try this at home’ label,” the Scientific American reported Thursday. “The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.”
Put another way, vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from COVID.
fee.org
Here's the study
www.medrxiv.org
A newly published medical study found that infection from COVID-19 confers considerably longer-lasting and stronger protection against the Delta variant of the virus than vaccines.
“The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a ‘Don’t try this at home’ label,” the Scientific American reported Thursday. “The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.”
Put another way, vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from COVID.
Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished
A new study on Israel's COVID outbreak found that vaccinated individuals had 27 times higher risk of symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from prior COVID infection.
fee.org
Here's the study
Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections
Background Reports of waning vaccine-induced immunity against COVID-19 have begun to surface. With that, the comparable long-term protection conferred by previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing three groups...
Another article on this story. Large text should be noted.This is how media sells the fear, look at the two titles:
Ohio judge orders hospital to treat COVID patient with Ivermectin despite CDC warnings
Ohio judge orders hospital to treat COVID patient with Ivermectin despite CDC warnings
The case is one of a handful nationwide where courts have forced doctors to use Ivermectin, which is unproven in the treatment of COVID-19.news.yahoo.com
Ohio Judge Orders Hospital to Treat COVID Patient With Deworming Drug Ivermectin
An Ohio judge has ordered a hospital to treat a COVID-19 patient with the controversial livestock drug ivermectin.
Butler County Common Pleas Judge Gregory Howard issued the ruling last week, forcing West Chester Hospital to treat Jeffrey Smith with the 30 milligrams of the drug daily for three weeks.
Smith's wife, Julie Smith, had sued the hospital after it refused to administer ivermectin—an animal dewormer that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have warned against in treating COVID-19.
Her husband tested positive for the coronavirus on July 9, according to court documents. He was hospitalized and admitted to the intensive care unit on July 15. On August 1, he was intubated and placed on a ventilator.
Julie Smith said she began researching other courses of treatment and found out about cases where patients had been given ivermectin.
She connected with her husband's physician, Dr. Fred Wagshul—described in the lawsuit as an "expert on using Ivermectin in treating Covid-19"—who prescribed the drug. The hospital then refused to administer it.
"My husband is on death's doorstep; he has no other options," she said. "With absolutely nothing to lose, with little to no risk, and with the Defendant likely to begin palliative care, there is no basis for it to refuse Dr. Wagshul's order and prescription to administer Ivermectin to their mutual patient."
Howard ruled in her favor on August 23, stating that the hospital "shall immediately administer" ivermectin to Smith, 51.
Newsweek reached out to West Chester Hospital for comment on the judge's ruling but didn't receive a response before publication.
Ivermectin is approved by the FDA for use in humans to treat certain parasitic worm infections. But federal regulators say there is no evidence it works on COVID-19 and warn that it can be dangerous in large doses.
"People who take inappropriately high doses of ivermectin above FDA-recommended dosing may experience toxic effects," the CDC said. The effects range from nausea and vomiting to seizures, coma and death.
The FDA said it has received "multiple reports of patients who have required medical support and been hospitalized after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for horses."
Ohio Judge Orders Hospital to Treat COVID Patient With Ivermectin
Federal regulators say there is no evidence ivermectin works on COVID-19 and warn it can be dangerous in large doses.www.newsweek.com
Look at the large text, but no one reads articles, just titles.
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
TIM DE CHANT - Yesterday at undefined
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
A county judge in Ohio has ordered a hospital in Cincinnati to administer ivermectin to an intensive care patient, a move raises questions about the role of the courts in the medical system.
“It is absurd that this order was issued,” Arthur Caplan, professor of bioethics at New York University’s Langone Medical Center, told Ars. “If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
The order was spurred by a lawsuit filed by Julie Smith, whose 51-year-old husband, Jeffrey, is being treated in West Chester Hospital for COVID-19. The lawsuit was first reported by the Ohio Capital Journal. Jeffrey has been in the hospital since July 15, and as his condition declined, his wife Julie began investigating alternative treatments.
A treatment without supporting evidence
During her husband’s time in the hospital, Julie found groups espousing the purported benefits of ivermectin, which she asked the hospital’s doctors to administer. They refused.
Ivermectin was initially developed as a treatment for river blindness and other parasitic infections. In the US, the FDA has approved it for two specific forms of parasitic infection as well as topical treatments for head lice. Importantly, the doses at which it's administered for internal use in humans are far lower than what’s available over-the-counter for treating parasitic infections in livestock. At high doses, ivermectin can cause serious side effects in humans, ranging from nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea to low blood pressure, seizures, coma, and death.
But people have clung to the idea that ivermectin can treat COVID after a study early in the pandemic suggested that it disrupted SARS-CoV-2’s ability to infect cells. What’s often overlooked is that study was limited to cells in Petri dishes. What’s more, when the NIH looked into it, the agency found that to achieve the ivermectin’s reported disruptive effects, the dose would have to be 100-times greater than what’s currently approved in humans. At those levels, the side-effects would likely be serious. The FDA has pleaded with people not to take ivermectin for COVID.
Still, that hasn’t stopped people on the Internet from encouraging its use. Prescriptions of the drug have spiked, and some people have resorted to buying livestock-grade ivermectin when they can’t obtain a script. Poison control centers have been inundated with calls, yet some doctors continue to push the drug for COVID despite potentially grave side effects and a lack of evidence.
Outside doctor
After watching her husband suffer in the hospital for more than a month, Julie Smith was desperate. He had been in the ICU since the day he was admitted, and he had to be intubated on August 1, according to the lawsuit. Two days later, his sedation wore off and he woke up, ripping the tube out of his throat and “disturbing and/or breaking the feeding tube, which caused food particles and toxins to escape into his lungs; this caused him to aspirate,” the lawsuit says. He developed an infection, which he is still fighting.
Distressed, his wife began investigating “other forms of treatment for COVID-19” and requested that the hospital doctors “administer Ivermectin pursuant to its dosage schedule,” the lawsuit says. Julie offered to sign a form releasing the doctors of any liability, but they refused.
It's unclear when Julie contacted Dr. Fred Wagshul, but on August 20, he prescribed ivermectin for Jeffrey. Wagshul is a pulmonologist with a practice near Dayton, Ohio, and he helps run the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, a group of doctors which encourage treatment of COVID with ivermectin, fluvoxamine, famotidine, and a smorgasbord of other drugs. Some of those drugs may work in limited circumstances, but most of them appear useless against the virus. Currently, Wagshul does not appear to have any privileges at any hospitals.
"Try anything"
Ivermectin “is absolutely not indicated for COVID. There is no standard of care saying you have to use it,” Caplan said. “Indeed, major medical groups advising against using it because people have died from it.” The judge’s order was asking hospital doctors to do something “unethical and illegal,” he said. “The doctors who are caring for the guy in the hospital are his doctors, not this guy,” Caplan added, referring to Dr. Wagshul.
The judge in the case likely feels that, because Jeffrey Smith is dying, that doctors should “try anything,” Caplan said. “Well, that’s false, because you can still kill him faster.”
“The judge is trying to throw a life preserver to a dying man. The problem is what he’s throwing is actually a 50 pound weight that’ll sink him.”
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”…
arstechnica.com
I actually wondered if he was under dosing him and giving it to him too long. This is from a Yahoo articleAnother article on this story. Large text should be noted.
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
TIM DE CHANT - Yesterday at undefined
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
A county judge in Ohio has ordered a hospital in Cincinnati to administer ivermectin to an intensive care patient, a move raises questions about the role of the courts in the medical system.
“It is absurd that this order was issued,” Arthur Caplan, professor of bioethics at New York University’s Langone Medical Center, told Ars. “If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
The order was spurred by a lawsuit filed by Julie Smith, whose 51-year-old husband, Jeffrey, is being treated in West Chester Hospital for COVID-19. The lawsuit was first reported by the Ohio Capital Journal. Jeffrey has been in the hospital since July 15, and as his condition declined, his wife Julie began investigating alternative treatments.
A treatment without supporting evidence
During her husband’s time in the hospital, Julie found groups espousing the purported benefits of ivermectin, which she asked the hospital’s doctors to administer. They refused.
Ivermectin was initially developed as a treatment for river blindness and other parasitic infections. In the US, the FDA has approved it for two specific forms of parasitic infection as well as topical treatments for head lice. Importantly, the doses at which it's administered for internal use in humans are far lower than what’s available over-the-counter for treating parasitic infections in livestock. At high doses, ivermectin can cause serious side effects in humans, ranging from nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea to low blood pressure, seizures, coma, and death.
But people have clung to the idea that ivermectin can treat COVID after a study early in the pandemic suggested that it disrupted SARS-CoV-2’s ability to infect cells. What’s often overlooked is that study was limited to cells in Petri dishes. What’s more, when the NIH looked into it, the agency found that to achieve the ivermectin’s reported disruptive effects, the dose would have to be 100-times greater than what’s currently approved in humans. At those levels, the side-effects would likely be serious. The FDA has pleaded with people not to take ivermectin for COVID.
Still, that hasn’t stopped people on the Internet from encouraging its use. Prescriptions of the drug have spiked, and some people have resorted to buying livestock-grade ivermectin when they can’t obtain a script. Poison control centers have been inundated with calls, yet some doctors continue to push the drug for COVID despite potentially grave side effects and a lack of evidence.
Outside doctor
After watching her husband suffer in the hospital for more than a month, Julie Smith was desperate. He had been in the ICU since the day he was admitted, and he had to be intubated on August 1, according to the lawsuit. Two days later, his sedation wore off and he woke up, ripping the tube out of his throat and “disturbing and/or breaking the feeding tube, which caused food particles and toxins to escape into his lungs; this caused him to aspirate,” the lawsuit says. He developed an infection, which he is still fighting.
Distressed, his wife began investigating “other forms of treatment for COVID-19” and requested that the hospital doctors “administer Ivermectin pursuant to its dosage schedule,” the lawsuit says. Julie offered to sign a form releasing the doctors of any liability, but they refused.
It's unclear when Julie contacted Dr. Fred Wagshul, but on August 20, he prescribed ivermectin for Jeffrey. Wagshul is a pulmonologist with a practice near Dayton, Ohio, and he helps run the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, a group of doctors which encourage treatment of COVID with ivermectin, fluvoxamine, famotidine, and a smorgasbord of other drugs. Some of those drugs may work in limited circumstances, but most of them appear useless against the virus. Currently, Wagshul does not appear to have any privileges at any hospitals.
"Try anything"
Ivermectin “is absolutely not indicated for COVID. There is no standard of care saying you have to use it,” Caplan said. “Indeed, major medical groups advising against using it because people have died from it.” The judge’s order was asking hospital doctors to do something “unethical and illegal,” he said. “The doctors who are caring for the guy in the hospital are his doctors, not this guy,” Caplan added, referring to Dr. Wagshul.
The judge in the case likely feels that, because Jeffrey Smith is dying, that doctors should “try anything,” Caplan said. “Well, that’s false, because you can still kill him faster.”
“The judge is trying to throw a life preserver to a dying man. The problem is what he’s throwing is actually a 50 pound weight that’ll sink him.”
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”…
I'm so sick of people making this political.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The Trumptards are spreading the idea of the use of Ivermectin, therefore the liberal media HAS to oppose it as well as hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and any other drug used in treatment of SARS Cov-2.
The CDC's stance is to push the vax. They have a target number (70-80% of the population) to reach before they dial down the campaign and introduce the possibility of other treatments. Mark my words on this date: THEY WILL DO THIS. It may be 2023 or so but they will do it. They want people vaccinated by any means necessary. If they don't reach the 70% mark, they may change tactics.
Pfizer is a huge company that controls many drugs distributed throughout the world. They have a lot of power and influence and right now, the vaccine is their major product to push.
I have no problems with vaccines, am fully vaccinated and follow science in these matters.
My question to Donjuan, Easy_B and all of the other trollers:
If you had a loved one who was vaccinated but still contracted covid-19 and was in the hospital, would you try to stop the doctors from using these "controversial" treatments to try to save them? If so, why? What media source has you so convinced that your religion aka politics is right?
It seems to me that nobody on here has effectively argued Killamayne and Mixd against usage. Also, a bit more for you "horse dewormer" labelists:
en.wikipedia.org
The so-called "horse dewormer" is listed on the WHO's essential medicines list.
This shit is NOT POLITICAL. Your new religion of politricks is failing all of you.
Liberals and conservatives are both fighting for their options when BOTH should be the mesaging but that never happens when money is involved. Pfizer is making money hand-over-fist in vaccine production and is not trying to see a dent in that money flow.
I implore you people who claim to be smart to do your research and stop watching an actor reading a script written by people sponsored by big corporations.
Again: You only have one life. Save it by any means necessary. Your religion aka politics is not worth dying for.
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines - PubMed
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Ivermectin in COVID Nineteen Study - PubMed
Ivermectin treatment was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19, especially in patients with severe pulmonary involvement. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The Trumptards are spreading the idea of the use of Ivermectin, therefore the liberal media HAS to oppose it as well as hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and any other drug used in treatment of SARS Cov-2.
The CDC's stance is to push the vax. They have a target number (70-80% of the population) to reach before they dial down the campaign and introduce the possibility of other treatments. Mark my words on this date: THEY WILL DO THIS. It may be 2023 or so but they will do it. They want people vaccinated by any means necessary. If they don't reach the 70% mark, they may change tactics.
Pfizer is a huge company that controls many drugs distributed throughout the world. They have a lot of power and influence and right now, the vaccine is their major product to push.
I have no problems with vaccines, am fully vaccinated and follow science in these matters.
My question to Donjuan, Easy_B and all of the other trollers:
If you had a loved one who was vaccinated but still contracted covid-19 and was in the hospital, would you try to stop the doctors from using these "controversial" treatments to try to save them? If so, why? What media source has you so convinced that your religion aka politics is right?
It seems to me that nobody on here has effectively argued Killamayne and Mixd against usage. Also, a bit more for you "horse dewormer" labelists:
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines - Wikipedia
The so-called "horse dewormer" is listed on the WHO's essential medicines list.
This shit is NOT POLITICAL. Your new religion of politricks is failing all of you.
Liberals and conservatives are both fighting for their options when BOTH should be the mesaging but that never happens when money is involved. Pfizer is making money hand-over-fist in vaccine production and is not trying to see a dent in that money flow.
I implore you people who claim to be smart to do your research and stop watching an actor reading a script written by people sponsored by big corporations.
Again: You only have one life. Save it by any means necessary. Your religion aka politics is not worth dying for.
BREAKING: In a major blow to vaccine efforts, senior FDA leaders stepping down
August 31, 2021 10:34 AM EDT
Two of the FDA’s most senior vaccine leaders are exiting from their positions, raising fresh questions about the Biden administration and the way that it’s sidelined the FDA.
Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research & Review and 32-year veteran of the agency, will leave at the end of October, and OVRR deputy director Phil Krause, who’s been at FDA for more than a decade, will leave in November. The news, first reported by BioCentury, is a massive blow to confidence in the agency’s ability to regulate vaccines.
The bombshell announcement comes at a particularly crucial moment, as boosters and children’s shots are being weighed by the regulator. The departures also come as the administration has recently jumped ahead of the FDA’s reviews of booster shots, announcing that they might be available by the week of Sept. 20.
A former senior FDA leader told Endpoints that they’re departing because they’re frustrated that CDC and their ACIP committee are involved in decisions that they think should be up to the FDA. The former FDAer also said he’s heard they’re upset with CBER director Peter Marks for not insisting that those decisions should be kept inside FDA. What finally did it for them was the White House getting ahead of FDA on booster shots.
FDA’s former acting chief scientist Luciana Borio added on Twitter, “FDA is losing two giants who helped bring us many safe and effective vaccines over decades of public service.”
“These two are the leaders for Biologic (vaccine) review in the US. They have a great team, but these two are the true leaders of CBER. A huge global loss if they both leave,” Former BARDA director Rick Bright wrote, weighing in on the news. “Dr. Gruber is much more than the Director. She is a global leader. Visionary mastermind behind global clinical regulatory science for flu, Ebola, Mers, Zika, Sars-cov-2, many others.”
endpts.com
August 31, 2021 10:34 AM EDT
Two of the FDA’s most senior vaccine leaders are exiting from their positions, raising fresh questions about the Biden administration and the way that it’s sidelined the FDA.
Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research & Review and 32-year veteran of the agency, will leave at the end of October, and OVRR deputy director Phil Krause, who’s been at FDA for more than a decade, will leave in November. The news, first reported by BioCentury, is a massive blow to confidence in the agency’s ability to regulate vaccines.
The bombshell announcement comes at a particularly crucial moment, as boosters and children’s shots are being weighed by the regulator. The departures also come as the administration has recently jumped ahead of the FDA’s reviews of booster shots, announcing that they might be available by the week of Sept. 20.
A former senior FDA leader told Endpoints that they’re departing because they’re frustrated that CDC and their ACIP committee are involved in decisions that they think should be up to the FDA. The former FDAer also said he’s heard they’re upset with CBER director Peter Marks for not insisting that those decisions should be kept inside FDA. What finally did it for them was the White House getting ahead of FDA on booster shots.
FDA’s former acting chief scientist Luciana Borio added on Twitter, “FDA is losing two giants who helped bring us many safe and effective vaccines over decades of public service.”
“These two are the leaders for Biologic (vaccine) review in the US. They have a great team, but these two are the true leaders of CBER. A huge global loss if they both leave,” Former BARDA director Rick Bright wrote, weighing in on the news. “Dr. Gruber is much more than the Director. She is a global leader. Visionary mastermind behind global clinical regulatory science for flu, Ebola, Mers, Zika, Sars-cov-2, many others.”
In a major blow to vaccine efforts, senior FDA leaders stepping down
Two of the FDA's most senior vaccine leaders are exiting from their positions, raising fresh questions about the Biden administration and the way that it's sidelined the FDA. Marion Gruber ...
endpts.com
If you don't @ their names, they won't see this.I'm so sick of people making this political.
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines - PubMed
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant...
Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Ivermectin in COVID Nineteen Study - PubMed
Ivermectin treatment was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19, especially in patients with severe pulmonary involvement. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
The Trumptards are spreading the idea of the use of Ivermectin, therefore the liberal media HAS to oppose it as well as hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and any other drug used in treatment of SARS Cov-2.
The CDC's stance is to push the vax. They have a target number (70-80% of the population) to reach before they dial down the campaign and introduce the possibility of other treatments. Mark my words on this date: THEY WILL DO THIS. It may be 2023 or so but they will do it. They want people vaccinated by any means necessary. If they don't reach the 70% mark, they may change tactics.
Pfizer is a huge company that controls many drugs distributed throughout the world. They have a lot of power and influence and right now, the vaccine is their major product to push.
I have no problems with vaccines, am fully vaccinated and follow science in these matters.
My question to Donjuan, Easy_B and all of the other trollers:
If you had a loved one who was vaccinated but still contracted covid-19 and was in the hospital, would you try to stop the doctors from using these "controversial" treatments to try to save them? If so, why? What media source has you so convinced that your religion aka politics is right?
It seems to me that nobody on here has effectively argued Killamayne and Mixd against usage. Also, a bit more for you "horse dewormer" labelists:
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines - Wikipedia
The so-called "horse dewormer" is listed on the WHO's essential medicines list.
This shit is NOT POLITICAL. Your new religion of politricks is failing all of you.
Liberals and conservatives are both fighting for their options when BOTH should be the mesaging but that never happens when money is involved. Pfizer is making money hand-over-fist in vaccine production and is not trying to see a dent in that money flow.
I implore you people who claim to be smart to do your research and stop watching an actor reading a script written by people sponsored by big corporations.
Again: You only have one life. Save it by any means necessary. Your religion aka politics is not worth dying for.
Don't think they are not lurking.
They have been popping in since the beginning of this thread.
I'm not trying to fight, I'm trying to appeal to common sense here.
What SHOULD be happening is the CDC should be pushing any and all forms of treatment including vaccines and re-purposed meds. If they really wanted to make a massive attempt to stomp out a pandemic, that would be the best course of action. Some things will work better than others, some things will not work on some peoples' physiology but all efforts should be on the table. Shouldn't people who are immunocompromised have options as well? (other than hope everyone around you is vaxxed)
We live in a capitalist society. Because of that, it won't happen.
The truth is, they don't want everyone to survive. They want "useful members of society" to survive.
This and many medical situations have always been about money for them.
I just saw a news clip with Fauci saying not to take ivermectin, of course because he has a financial benefit in Moderna and Remdesivir.
Many scientists and that field are afraid to oppose him or your career is basically over.
But overall, like many treatments, there are simple things like Artemisinin, which is Worm Wood can kill cancer cells with no harm to any other cells. But why would a doctor suggest that when they can put you thru chemo that could cost tens of thousands of dollars?
Many doctors suggest many medications in their "practice" because they get kickbacks from the pharma companies. That's no secret. So why would they suggest a pill for pennies, as opposed to Remdesivir and Regeneron that cost thousands per treatment? How much they make?
Another article on this story. Large text should be noted.
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
TIM DE CHANT - Yesterday at undefined
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
A county judge in Ohio has ordered a hospital in Cincinnati to administer ivermectin to an intensive care patient, a move raises questions about the role of the courts in the medical system.
“It is absurd that this order was issued,” Arthur Caplan, professor of bioethics at New York University’s Langone Medical Center, told Ars. “If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”
The order was spurred by a lawsuit filed by Julie Smith, whose 51-year-old husband, Jeffrey, is being treated in West Chester Hospital for COVID-19. The lawsuit was first reported by the Ohio Capital Journal. Jeffrey has been in the hospital since July 15, and as his condition declined, his wife Julie began investigating alternative treatments.
A treatment without supporting evidence
During her husband’s time in the hospital, Julie found groups espousing the purported benefits of ivermectin, which she asked the hospital’s doctors to administer. They refused.
Ivermectin was initially developed as a treatment for river blindness and other parasitic infections. In the US, the FDA has approved it for two specific forms of parasitic infection as well as topical treatments for head lice. Importantly, the doses at which it's administered for internal use in humans are far lower than what’s available over-the-counter for treating parasitic infections in livestock. At high doses, ivermectin can cause serious side effects in humans, ranging from nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea to low blood pressure, seizures, coma, and death.
But people have clung to the idea that ivermectin can treat COVID after a study early in the pandemic suggested that it disrupted SARS-CoV-2’s ability to infect cells. What’s often overlooked is that study was limited to cells in Petri dishes. What’s more, when the NIH looked into it, the agency found that to achieve the ivermectin’s reported disruptive effects, the dose would have to be 100-times greater than what’s currently approved in humans. At those levels, the side-effects would likely be serious. The FDA has pleaded with people not to take ivermectin for COVID.
Still, that hasn’t stopped people on the Internet from encouraging its use. Prescriptions of the drug have spiked, and some people have resorted to buying livestock-grade ivermectin when they can’t obtain a script. Poison control centers have been inundated with calls, yet some doctors continue to push the drug for COVID despite potentially grave side effects and a lack of evidence.
Outside doctor
After watching her husband suffer in the hospital for more than a month, Julie Smith was desperate. He had been in the ICU since the day he was admitted, and he had to be intubated on August 1, according to the lawsuit. Two days later, his sedation wore off and he woke up, ripping the tube out of his throat and “disturbing and/or breaking the feeding tube, which caused food particles and toxins to escape into his lungs; this caused him to aspirate,” the lawsuit says. He developed an infection, which he is still fighting.
Distressed, his wife began investigating “other forms of treatment for COVID-19” and requested that the hospital doctors “administer Ivermectin pursuant to its dosage schedule,” the lawsuit says. Julie offered to sign a form releasing the doctors of any liability, but they refused.
It's unclear when Julie contacted Dr. Fred Wagshul, but on August 20, he prescribed ivermectin for Jeffrey. Wagshul is a pulmonologist with a practice near Dayton, Ohio, and he helps run the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, a group of doctors which encourage treatment of COVID with ivermectin, fluvoxamine, famotidine, and a smorgasbord of other drugs. Some of those drugs may work in limited circumstances, but most of them appear useless against the virus. Currently, Wagshul does not appear to have any privileges at any hospitals.
"Try anything"
Ivermectin “is absolutely not indicated for COVID. There is no standard of care saying you have to use it,” Caplan said. “Indeed, major medical groups advising against using it because people have died from it.” The judge’s order was asking hospital doctors to do something “unethical and illegal,” he said. “The doctors who are caring for the guy in the hospital are his doctors, not this guy,” Caplan added, referring to Dr. Wagshul.
The judge in the case likely feels that, because Jeffrey Smith is dying, that doctors should “try anything,” Caplan said. “Well, that’s false, because you can still kill him faster.”
“The judge is trying to throw a life preserver to a dying man. The problem is what he’s throwing is actually a 50 pound weight that’ll sink him.”
Judge’s order requiring hospital to give COVID patient ivermectin called “unethical”
“If I were these doctors, I simply wouldn’t do it.”…
Shit...fuck that...1.5 cc a day..slay covid 19...for a average person....3 cc a day...is reserved for a Mayne like me...me and my folks are with it...and gone stay with it...these politicians are so full of shit...a laxative can't help em...I'm keeping mine and taking it...brah
Shit...I want to fight a hoe..daily...I go out into the world to see who want it... brah
I'm so sick of people making this political.
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines - PubMed
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant...
Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Ivermectin in COVID Nineteen Study - PubMed
Ivermectin treatment was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19, especially in patients with severe pulmonary involvement. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
The Trumptards are spreading the idea of the use of Ivermectin, therefore the liberal media HAS to oppose it as well as hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and any other drug used in treatment of SARS Cov-2.
The CDC's stance is to push the vax. They have a target number (70-80% of the population) to reach before they dial down the campaign and introduce the possibility of other treatments. Mark my words on this date: THEY WILL DO THIS. It may be 2023 or so but they will do it. They want people vaccinated by any means necessary. If they don't reach the 70% mark, they may change tactics.
Pfizer is a huge company that controls many drugs distributed throughout the world. They have a lot of power and influence and right now, the vaccine is their major product to push.
I have no problems with vaccines, am fully vaccinated and follow science in these matters.
My question to Donjuan, Easy_B and all of the other trollers:
If you had a loved one who was vaccinated but still contracted covid-19 and was in the hospital, would you try to stop the doctors from using these "controversial" treatments to try to save them? If so, why? What media source has you so convinced that your religion aka politics is right?
It seems to me that nobody on here has effectively argued Killamayne and Mixd against usage. Also, a bit more for you "horse dewormer" labelists:
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines - Wikipedia
The so-called "horse dewormer" is listed on the WHO's essential medicines list.
This shit is NOT POLITICAL. Your new religion of politricks is failing all of you.
Liberals and conservatives are both fighting for their options when BOTH should be the mesaging but that never happens when money is involved. Pfizer is making money hand-over-fist in vaccine production and is not trying to see a dent in that money flow.
I implore you people who claim to be smart to do your research and stop watching an actor reading a script written by people sponsored by big corporations.
Again: You only have one life. Save it by any means necessary. Your religion aka politics is not worth dying for.
Them bitches ain't smart...I want to bash they fuckin heads in...and get real aggressive with they bitch... sexually... brah
The discussion continues, Brother. Do what you feel is best for you. The article stated that in order for doses of Ivermectin to be effective enough to SARS-Cov-2, the dose would have to be 100 times greater than what's approved for humans, which could result in life-threatening side effects.
So then, I'm left with two questions. The first is, if this thing is unregulated, then how does one know that for example, pregnant women, people with auto-immune diseases, cancer or MS patients, elderly, severe diabetics or folks with a number of other pre-existing health conditions would not seriously be at risk for something going wrong and them dying if they take a high enough dosage of Ivermectin to inhibit Covid?
Second question, and I mean no disrespect, but you said you've had Covid three times and beat it- which I'm glad for. How are you coming down with Corona so much though?
What does this have to do with Ivermectin or any of the re-purposed drugs?
Please cite the article exactly where it states this.
For treatment, at minimum, you need 10mg per 100 pounds. (1ml or 1cc of the liquid form is equal to 10mg of Ivermectin).
More if you are very sick. Which is 2-3x that dosage. What you may be reading is that in higher doses, which is is only for animals. Nut they still prescribe exactly the same for animal body weight is 0.2mg per kg.
So in the one case of the doctor in Ohio, he directed 30mg, ideal for someone like 300lbs and initially sick. I don't know the husband's weight, so can't say what exactly is recommended. But the doc is on it so he should know dosage recommendations.
As for @killagram he said he had Covid twice then the third time learned of Ivermectin and that's when he used it I believe. The last instance.